Nikon SLR Cameras

Is 18-55mm lens better or 55-200mm lens better to get with a DSLR?

Kay
Kay

I'm planning to get a DSLR. I don't know to use it.
I'm going for Nikon D3200 as per all Internet research. But it comes with diff lens kits.
18-55mm, 55-105mm, 18-200mm and 55-200mm i think.
My usage will be outing with family and some landscapes on the go. & also price also matters.
(I want good high clarity pics with good looking background and better detailed foreground)
Can anybody say if 18-55mm is ok for this or should i get anything else.

Luke
Luke

It really depends on how far away from the subject you will be photographing, I use the 18-55mm for every day use, so objects upclose and the 55-200mm for things a bit further away. But it's just personal choice. I would probably recommend the 18-55mm for what you are doing.

Jim A
Jim A

Yes, especially since you have no experience with these cameras. The 18-55 besides being a very good lens is also a good learning tool as you figure out how to properly operate both camera and lens.

Andrew
Andrew

Ideally, 18-55mm AND 55-200mm, but get the 18-55mm first.

BriaR
BriaR

The 18-55 is a great starter lens for family shots and landscapes. It is light and covers a useful range. The 18-200 is a great one lens solution but is significantly bigger and heavier.
Start with the 18055. After you have had it a while, if you get deeper into photography then your frustrations will dictate the next lens.

John P
John P

The 18 to 55 gives you a 'standard zoom' with adjustment between medium wide-angle and slight tele - ok for portraits but not powerful enough for sports or wildlife. A 55 to 200 moves on upwards from the '55' and gives a useful but not huge degree of tele for sports etc. If you only got the 55 to 200 you would have no 'normal' or 'wide-angle' capability, e.g. You would not be able to cover family stuff at home or in the garden. For some sports or wildlife you would need at least 300mm, perhaps 400mm.

keerok
keerok

The 18-55mm lens is enough to take most common shooting scenarios including family and landscapes. The 55-200mm will add more capability to shoot distant objects. The 70-300mm would be better. An 18-270mm would practically cover the range of an 18-55mm and a 70-300mm but will suffer from poorer optics. All are explained in the long read below.

http://keerok-photography.blogspot.com/2011/05/lenses-so-many-of-them-there-is-no-best.html

I can shoot professionally with just the 18-55mm lens.

Martin
Martin

I doubt the camera comes with only the 55-200mm lens as a kit. The standard kit lens is the 18-55mm and sometimes it comes as a dual lens kit with both 18-55mm and 55-200mm lenses.

There's no 55-105mm lens although you might mean the 18-105mm?

VR means Vibration Reduction in Nikon. Be aware that there are both VR and non-VR versions of both the 18-55mm and 55-200mm lenses. The VR is worth having, especially on the 55-200mm lens and the difference in price between the VR and non-VR versions is not very much.

For family and landscapes get the 18-55mm VR lens. If you can afford the option of getting the 18-105mm VR lens then go for that. It is a better, sharper lens and will be far more useful.

You might find a twin lens kit with both the 18-55mm and 55-200mm lenses, but be careful. It is often cheaper to buy the camera with 18-55mm VR lens and then buy the 55-200mm VR lens separately. Some 2-lens kits come with the non-VR version of the 55-200mm lens, which is not so good.

The 18-200mm VR lens is very good but very expensive. The 18-55mm VR and 55-200mm VR lenses bought together will be far cheaper. That means you would need to change lenses occasionally, but it is quite a big difference in price.

Personally I would start with either the 18-55mm VR or 18-105mm VR lens if I could afford it. If you find you need to get closer later on then you can consider the 55-300mm VR lens, which would give you a lot more range. If you find that you don't need the longer lens you can put the money towards something else!